Celebrity Justice
R. Kelly Jurors: No Doubt It's Him on the Tape

Even though jurors in the trial of R. Kelly absolutely believed it was him on the tape, they could not reach a guilty verdict because they said there was "not enough evidence to prosecute." Huh?!

Five of the twelve jurors met with reporters immediately after handing down the acquittal. They said they just couldn't reach a verdict even though they voted on the hour, every hour because the alleged victim hadn't testified and refused to cooperate. As recently as this morning, we're told, the vote was split nine to three for a not guilty verdict.

The jurors were also "absolutely disgusted" with the tape. Unlike the bootleg version you can buy on the street corner, the version they got to watch was "clear as day."

We're hearing R. Kelly will be partying it up tonight in Chicago.

Tags: R. Kelly, R.Kelly

Reader Comments

(Page 6 of 6) Previous 15 Comments

76. I'd cut IT off and make an 'IT SMOOTHIE'. I'D then watch the perverted ass hole SWALLOW. He'd never be able to use IT again.

Posted at 8:14AM on Jun 16th 2008 by DEBBIE

77. Did anyone else notice how many times the "guy" adjusted the camera in the video? Since I did not hear this "guy" break out in song -- I'm not convinced it was actually R. Kelly? (If he had, you'd all know it, too!) Are you absolutely 100% sure he is not the victim in all this? Celebrity status means that every action is dissected under a (tv or video) microscope. Could you stand that invasion into your personal life? He and his wife appear to be happy and well-adjusted. This too will pass.

Posted at 12:07PM on Jun 16th 2008 by Carolina - Here I Come

78. How much do you this that law firm made in the 6 years it took to bring this to trial? I'd be willing to guess about $6 million -- with the meetings, lunches, travel and hotels, research and support staff (i.e., about $1 million per year) that's where the money went. Hope R has a retirement plan . . . and isn't on the verge of filing for b/ruptcy . . .

Posted at 12:17PM on Jun 16th 2008 by Carolina - Here I Come

79. .

Not that anybody cares anymore, but: An aquittal DOES NOT equal not guilty!! It simply means, not enough to CONVICT!


Posted at 12:20PM on Jun 16th 2008 by Kate

80. This is really a shame. This man has gotten away with this for years (every other case has been settled out of court). He has a history of sleeping with girls under the age of 17, hell he even married a fifteen year old.

I don't think it is a race thing, it's a celebrity thing. As long as you are famous you can get away with anything.

Posted at 12:56AM on Jun 18th 2008 by Pernette

81. #62, 71 and 72...Lighten Up! This entire site and all comments are just for laughs! I am so glad I made your day. "Chocolate" is good for PMS....BTW, I didn't graduate from high school...I am only 13 myself. Smell that...you Beotch...

Posted at 1:36PM on Jun 16th 2008 by MiMi

82. Hide your underage daughters :)
Justice can be so sweet with the right Lawyers

Posted at 3:44PM on Jun 16th 2008 by tg

83. Don't blame the Jurors - they only get to hear and see and JUDGE as the JUDGE and Lawyers TELL THEM. Sometimes what can make a person guilty or INNOCENT is not ever heard in the court room. Please blame the proper people - the Judges and Lawyers.

Posted at 3:46PM on Jun 16th 2008 by tg

Previous 15 Comments